Awhile ago I got into a heated political debate with a conservative, right winged friend of mine. I use the term friend loosely. At one point we ended a round with this:
I said if no harm is done, how is something wrong? I'm not married to this statement, I want to test it. He responded with "there are plenty of things that are wrong that don't involve harming someone, Huey." I challenged him to give me one. I haven't heard one yet.
I thought about this the other day in the car. There HAS to be something we can agree is universally wrong without someone getting harmed right? I think I came up with one but I have since forgotten it.
I need replies to this blog. What are some wrong things that don't involve harming another person? And I would like to examine why they are wrong?
This loosely connects to my thoughts and why people do good. This dives more into the semantics of good and bad I guess. (I hope I used semantics correctly in that sentence)
7 comments:
I think anything that is wrong hurts someone, someway. Of course we may not be hurt physically, but emotional scars can add up and cause something terrible to happen.
I agree. So would you say then that if there is no harm, then it is not wrong?
Yeah, but what do you consider harmful? Also, just because something is hurtful doesn't mean that it's wrong.
Ok then, lets discuss:
Is it wrong to cheat on a test?
Is it wrong to lie in EVERY situation?
Is it wrong to THINK (and NOT act) about comitting a crime?
Is it wrong to spoil a child?
Is it wrong to throw food away when people are starving in Africa (and America for that matter)?
Is a baseball player taking steroids wrong?
I would say there is harm done to yourself when you cheat on a test. It depends on the situation as to what the specific harm is though.
If no one is harmed by the lie then I would say no it is not wrong.
I definitely think it is not wrong to THINK about a crime (if it isn't acted upon) leading to no harm since it is nothing but a thought. I mean what is temptation? We are always tempted to do wrong things but mostly don't right? Temptation is a given and doesn't make you wrong. Acting on it may make you or it wrong. But the temptation itself can't be in my mind.
Again, if the spoiling is causing harm for the child then it is wrong, even if that harm is long term and not immediate. If there is no harm being done, then I don't know if I see it as wrong.
Throwing away food with starving people is a good one. No direct harm right? But it is hard to look at it as not wrong.
Steroids. They are harmful to the person taking them in terms of health. Therefore, harm is involved and it would be wrong.
So my question remains, if no harm is involved, is it wrong?
So much of this gets blurred in the fact that it is really relative as a friend of mine mentioned in an email regarding this post.
Is harm a mandatory component of wrongness?
So if I cheat on my wife and she doesn't know about it (and it doesn't bother me at all), you are telling me it is not wrong?
I am not saying, just asking.
Assuming cheated partner never finds out and cheater doesn't feel any guilt....hmmmmmmmmmm.
My knee jerk reaction is that it is still wrong. But as I try to stay in my original frame of mind and remain totally objective I ask myself what is it that is wrong with cheating? Is it the act itself or the pain felt by the cheated or some other aspect I am not thinking of at this time?
If what makes cheating wrong is the pain the cheated feels as a result and they never feel that pain since they never find out....then I suppose it wouldn't be wrong. But if the act itself is wrong, then why of course it is wrong regardless.
Post a Comment